Force fields, Molecular Mechanics CHARMM

Hypercube, Inc. at http //www.hyper.com offers molecular modeling packages under the HyperChem name. HyperChem s newest version, Hyper-Chem Release 7.5, is a full 32-bit application, developed for the Windows 95, 98, NT, ME, 2000, and XP operating systems. Density Functional Theory (DFT) has been added as a basic computational engine to complement Molecular Mechanics, Semiempirical Quantum Mechanics and ab initio Quantum Mechanics. The DFT engine includes four combination or hybrid functions, such as the popular B3-LYP or Becke-97 methods. The Bio+ force field in HyperChem represents a version of the Chemistry at HARvard using Molecular Mechanics (CHARMM) force field. Release 7.5 of HyperChem updates... 

The rhodopsin protein problem An all-atom rhodopsin protein was set in a solvated lipid bilayer described via the Chemistry at Harvard Molecular Mechanics (CHARMM) force field. Long-range coulomb interactions were described via the particle-particle mesh. SHAKE constraints were applied to the system for the definitions of the force field and constraints. Further, the model consisted of counter ions with a reduced amount of water the effect was to have a total system with 32,000 atoms that was simulated for 100 time steps. This simulation was performed at a constant pressure and temperature with an LJ force cutoff of 10.0 Angstroms. In this problem, the total number of neighbors per atom was 440 within this force cutoff More information about the benchmark problem can be found at http //lammps.sandia.gOv/bench.html rhodo... 

AMI AMBER A Program for Simulation of Biological and Organic Molecules CHARMM The Energy Function and Its Parameterization Combined Quantum Mechanics and Molecular Mechanics Approaches to Chemical and Biochemical Reactivity Density Functional Theory (DFT), Hartree-Fock (HF), and the Self-consistent Field Divide and Conquer for Semiempirical MO Methods Electrostatic Catalysis Force Fields A General Discussion Force Fields CFF GROMOS Force Field Hybrid Methods Hybrid Quantum Mechanical/Molecular Mechanical (QM/MM) Methods Mixed Quantum-Classical Methods MNDO MNDO/d Molecular Dynamics Techniques and Applications to Proteins OPLS Force Fields Parameterization of Semiempirical MO Methods PM3 Protein Force Fields Quantum Mechanical/Molecular Mechanical (QM/MM) Coupled Potentials Quantum Mecha-nics/Molecular Mechanics (QM/MM) SINDOI Parameterization and Application. 

CHARMM (chemistry at Harvard macromolecular mechanics) a molecular mechanics force field... 

In an attempt to aid interpretation of the IR spectrum of MbCO we decided to model the full protein by use of a hybrid quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics approach (QM/MM), to evaluate changes in the CO stretching frequency for different protein conformations. The QM/MM method used [44] combines a first-principles description of the active center with a force-field treatment (using the CHARMM force field) of the rest of the protein. The QM-MM boundary is modeled by use of link atoms (four in the heme vinyl and propionate substituents and one on the His64 residue). Our QM region will include the CO ligand, the porphyrin, and the axial imidazole (Fig. 3.13). The vinyl and propionate porphyrin substituents were not included, because we had previously found they did not affect the properties of the Fe-ligand bonds (Section 3.3.1). It was, on the other hand, crucial to include the imidazole of the proximal His (directly bonded to the... 

The molecular mechanics method is extremely parameter dependent. A force field equation that has been empirically parameterized for calculating peptides must be used for peptides it cannot be applied to nucleic acids without being re-parameterized for that particular class of molecules. Thankfully, most small organic molecules, with molecular weights less than 800, share similar properties. Therefore, a force field that has been parameterized for one class of drug molecules can usually be transferred to another class of drug molecules. In medicinal chemistry and quantum pharmacology, a number of force fields currently enjoy widespread use. The MM2/MM3/MMX force fields are currently widely used for small molecules, while AMBER and CHARMM are used for macromolecules such as peptides and nucleic acids. 

MD simulations provide a detailed insight in the behavior of molecular systems in both space and time, with ranges of up to nanometers and nanoseconds attainable for a system of the size of a CYP enzyme in solution. However, MD simulations are based on empirical molecular mechanics (MM) force field descriptions of interactions in the system, and therefore depend directly on the quality of the force field parameters (92). Commonly used MD programs for CYPs are AMBER (93), CHARMM (94), GROMOS (95), and GROMACS (96), and results seem to be comparable between methods (also listed in Table 2). For validation, direct comparisons between measured parameters and parameters calculated from MD simulations are possible, e.g., for fluorescence (97) and NMR (cross-relaxation) (98,99). In many applications where previously only energy minimization would be applied, it is now common to perform one or several MD simulations, as Ludemann et al. and Winn et al. (100-102) performed in studies of substrate entrance and product exit. 

Force-field-based scoring functions use arbitrary empirical estimates of interaction energies obtained by molecular mechanics energy functions. This simple approximation, which takes into account only enthalpic contribution often correlates well with the experiment. Solvent effects are described by atom-based solvation parameters, which are computed for the surface of both ligand and receptor which is buried upon complexation. DOCK-chemical27 and CHARMm scoring functions represent this class. 

No experimental results are available for the nucleic acids, with or without methyl substitution, to test the theories, but we can compare the results for thymine to three theoretical estimates based on the linearized Poisson-Boltzmann equation. The AM1-SM2 and PM3-SM3 values are —16.5 and -20.1 kcal/mol, respectively. Using charges and force field parameters from the AMBER,347 CHARMM, and OPLS molecular mechanics force fields and a solute dielectric constant of 1, Mohan et al.i calculated solvation energies of -19.1, -10.4, and -8.4 kcal/mol. The wide variation is disconcerting. In light of such wide variations with off-the-shelf parameters, the SMx approach based on parameters specifically adjusted to solvation energies appears to be more reliable. 

To accommodate better the presence of multiple minima and low energy barriers, both CHARMM and MM3 use Fourier expansions in the torsional angle. In fact, virtually all molecular mechanics force fields use Fourier terms for the torsional angle potential energies. 

Many technical limitations remain to be overcome before ligand design becomes reliable and routine. Many deficiencies in molecular mechanics previously cited remain that limit reliability. Adequate modeling of electrostatics remains elusive in many experimental systems of interest such as membranes. Newer derivations of force fields, such as MM3 (27, 296 and references therein), CHARMM (297, 298), AMBER/OPLS (157), ECEPP (299), and others (156, 300), are attempting to more accurately represent the experimental data, whereas others include a broader spec-... 

The CHARMM (Chemistry at HARvard Macromolecular Mechanics) force field is designed for the modelling (both molecular mechanics and dynamics calculations) of macromolecular systems [67]. A revision for carbohydrates was made by Ha et al. [40]. Kouwijzer and Grootenhuis [68-69] redeveloped the CHEAT force field a CHARMm-based force field for carbohydrates with which a molecule in aqueous solution is mimicked by a simulation of the isolated molecule. 

It is beyond the scope of this short review to list every available molecular mechanics program. Only a selected few programs are mentioned here, without descriptive details of the potential functions, minimization algorithms, or comparative evaluations. Both the CHARMM and AMBER force fields use harmonic potential functions to calculate protein structures. They were developed in the laboratories of Karplus and Kollman, respectively, and work remarkably well. The CFF and force fields use more complex potential functions. Both force fields were developed in commercial settings and based extensively or exclusively on results obtained from quantum mechanics. Unlike the other molecular mechanics methods, the OPLS force field was parameterized by Jorgensen to simulate solution phase phenomena. 

Standard molecular mechanics (MM) methods (e.g. the popular force fields developed for AMBER, CHARMM and GROMOS decribed in Section 2 above) provide a good description of protein structure and dynamics, but cannot be used to model chemical reactions. This limitation is due their simple functional forms (e.g. harmonic terms for bond stretching) and inability to model changes in electronic polarization (because of the invariant point partial atomic charge used by these molecular mechanics methods to represent electrostatic interactions). 

---